zlacker

Actual article:

> The planet’s temperature spiked on Tuesday to its hottest day in decades and likely centuries,

It's not talking about "greenhouse Earth". Anyways, for immediate concerns we only need to look at the Meghalayan age.

>>chx+(OP)
There’s also the time when the surface was molten. The day the moon was created was probably a scorcher :)

That day might be the candidate for the first day earth existed given it gained quite a bit of mass. (Given the theory the earth-moon system was created by the collision of a couple of planetary bodies)

>>chx+(OP)
“Likely centuries” means, “it could be.” Its bs climate sensationalism and this data only goes back to the 1980s.

>>edgyqu+33
Global surface level temperatures do not jump around like that by degrees and we do not have proof for a mass aridification event for some thousands of years so no it's not bullshit.

>>chx+24
No it’s bullshit, I’m not sure what your point is about “jumping around” or aridification because those aren’t the only effects or causes of high temperatures and regardless the point is that this data is not even a century old so claiming some point in it is “likely the highest in centuries” is facetious statistics.

>>edgyqu+ui
> this data is not even a century old

The instrumental temperature record is typically considered to start in 1850 so I am not sure what do you mean by "this data". But 100 or 200 hardly matters.

What I meant is while we don't have day-to-day precise data, we don't quite need it because the global temperature doesn't change that much and we do have some ideas -- paleoclimatologists are crafty -- and if the surface would have heated like now that would have had long term effects and we haven't seen any.

So yes, we can, with a reasonable confidence say it has not been this hot for centuries.

>>edgyqu+33
Climate data (including temperature) exists much further back, albeit with lower certainty, measured through proxy variables. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_(climate)